Civilization advances because, every so often, individuals with extraordinary minds produce insights the rest of us could never reach. Without such rare figures, the modern world—from the railway or the motor car to digital technology—simply wouldn’t exist. James Watson, who passed away on November 6, 2025 at the age of 97, was almost universally regarded as one of these exceptional people. His discovery (and it was his discovery) of the double-helix structure of DNA earned him a Nobel Prize and ultimately transformed fields as diverse as oncology and forensic science. Yet few are willing to consider that Watson might have been among the last great geniuses produced by Western society.
In 2007, Watson made public comments linking race and intelligence. He noted how low the average IQ of Sub-Saharan and how this means that its nations cannot possibly reach a Western level of development; their future will be poverty and chaos. These remarks ignited a level of outrage far beyond anything he had previously experienced.
As I detail in my recent (and the final) biography of him, Genius Under House Arrest: The Cancellation of James Watson, Watson had a long history of making blunt or uncomfortable observations, or even “gaffes.” Earlier in his career these had prompted little more than irritated criticism from defenders of social orthodoxy, such as in 2000 when he upset female students at a lecture at the University of California at Berkley by noting that thin women tend to be depressed and that dark skin is associated with a higher sex drive.
But by 2007, a cultural shift had taken place: the emerging ideology we now call “Woke” had begun to override traditional scientific values such as empirical truth and achievement. The backlash this time was swift and total, effectively exiling Watson from public life.
Watson became a symbol—a widely publicized example meant to warn others against straying from accepted narratives. If someone of his stature could be ostracized, anyone could be. Western society had flipped from encouraging intellectual non-conformity and tolerating the quirks of brilliant minds to treating such people as threats.
In a climate dominated by emotional sensitivity and the insistence that “equality” outweighs facts, people with a genius profile suddenly found themselves vulnerable. This is deeply damaging because, as I argue in the book, genius is a psychological package deal: exceptional creativity is almost always accompanied by traits that society finds difficult.